Factores que afectan la estructura de las antocianinas

Under the New Order influential censorship of the media was based on the principle of SARA (an abbreviation of Suku (ethnic groups), Agama (religion), Ras (race), and Antar-golongan (class)). The mass media were not permitted to cover these subjects in any critical way as there was a fear that this would destabilize the nation. Besides the guidelines for SARA, rules and regulations were drawn up specifically for film administered by the Film Censor Board (Badan Sensor Film, BSF; after 1992 Film Censor Institute, Lembaga Sensor Film, LSF). The members of the Film Censor Institute consisted of representatives of the government, the legal fraternity, the army, film producers, and several religious organizations, among them the Indonesian Ulama Council, the Nahdlatul Ulama, the Muhammadiyah, the Council of Churches in Indonesia (Dewan Gereja-gereja di Indonesia, DGI), the Bishops’ Conference of Indonesia (Konferensi Wali Gereja Indonesia, KWI), and the Hinduism Society (Parisada Hindu Dharma Indonesia) (‘LSF diminta.’1995). Both domestic films and imported products had to pass the board of censors before they could be released in cinemas, on television, or distributed in the format of video cassettes, VCD, and DVD. As mentioned in Chapters Two and Five, next to the official censorship regulations laid down in Indonesian Film Legislation, a special Ethical Code for Film Production was created in 1981.10 _However,

despite the involvement of a special commission for administering religious principles in the creation of the Ethical Code for film production and the co-operation of representatives of religious mass organizations in the censorship system, from time to time there were protests about films, which were led by religious, mainly Islamic, communities and (mass) organizations. These protests interfered directly in censorship proceedings, or were raised to demand the withdrawal of films which had already been released by the board. Such protests were apparently random though: not all films which may conceivably have been rejected on the grounds of religious sentiments raised objections, and at times protests were elicited by films which contained nothing that could be construed as contrary to religious teachings.

Between 1993 and 1997 such groups as Communication Forum of Dakwah Institutions (Forum Komunikasi Lembaga Dakwah, FKLD), the Association of Islamic Students (Himpuan Mahasiswa Islam, HMI), the Indonesian Committee for Solidarity in the Islamic World (Komite Indonesia untuk Solidaritas Dunia Islam, KISDI), and branches of MUI in different provinces of Indonesia all lodged protests about films.11 _{The greatest objection was}

to what were interpreted as ‘pornographic’ images in Indonesian films. Ever since the 1970s various Indonesian films had toyed with an impression of female nudity and sex. Members of Muslim organizations in particular feared that these films would have a bad influence on the young generation and lead them to stray from religion. The films were deemed to be unacceptable from the point of view of religion and to oppose the essence of Indonesian cultures and traditions. Anwar Sanusi from the Institution for the Study and Development of Islamic Dakwah (Lembaga Pengkajian dan Pengembangan Dakwah Islam, LPPDI) and Ahmad Suaidy and Husein Umar, respectively head of and spokesperson for the FKLD, said that Indonesia was a pious nation (hht 1993; Sanusi 1993; spw 1994). Even though the majority of those protesting about films were members of Muslim groups, leaders of other religious groups upheld the same ideas about pornography. They also argued that films which contained nudity or sex should be forbidden: ‘The sentiments of the Islamic community are also those of the Roman Catholic, Protestant, Hindu and Buddhist communities’ (U-1 1996).

Alongside regular protests about the circulation of both legal and illegal pornographic films and videos or the qualms voiced about sexy film posters, which mainly tended to be lodged during the fasting month Ramadan, under the New Order there were three particular cases in which protests about films sparked heated controversy.12 _{In all three cases, Muslim}

protests interfered in the work of the film censor. Twice the controversy involved imported films from the US. The first of these was True Lies (James Cameron, 1994), which was perceived to be an insult to Muslims as they were represented as terrorists. Even though True Lies had passed the censor institute, Muslim groups demanded it to be withdrawn from circulation. The upshot was that its popularity soared and it was transformed into an item very much in demand in pirated videos sales. The second film which upset Muslim sensibilities was Schindler’s List (Steven Spielberg, 1993), which never reached Indonesian cinemas. Before they had even watched the film, some Muslim groups were convinced that it contained Jewish propaganda and protested against its release in Indonesia. In order not to incite Muslim protests any more than were already aroused, but also because it did not get permission from the film-maker to cut any scenes, the censor institute decided not to release the film (‘Schindler’s List.’1994). Again this film proved a popular item which was widely available in piracy networks. A third controversial case involving efforts to override state censorship by Muslim groups was sparked by the Indonesian film production Pembalasan

Ratu Laut Selatan (Revenge of the queen of the southern sea, Tjut Djalil, 1988). This film was a horror story about a legendary goddess who harbours a snake in her vagina which bites off the vital organs of men who have sex with her. Pembalasan Ratu Laut Selatan had passed the Film Censor Board but after its release Islamic organizations raised a hue and cry about the film’s content. The organizations objected to the pornographic theme of the film and singled out particular scenes for especially hard criticism. Because of the uproar caused by these protests after a few days the film was withdrawn from cinemas.

about. Just as various groups and film-makers were experimenting with testing the boundaries of Reformation’s new freedom of expression, some Islamic groups were gauging the extent to which they could have their say in the restriction of these liberties.13 _{Such Islamic groups}

as the Paramilitary Unit of Indonesian People Against Piracy and Pornography (Laskar Masyarakat Anti Pembajakan dan Pornografi Indonesia, MAPPI), a special force consisting of some 750 people, [the majority of whom were part of the banser (paramilitary wing) of NU], FPI, and PKS, organized themselves to win victories over what they considered amoral, anti-Islamic film products. MAPPI instigated raids to halt the selling of pirated or banned films, which involved demolishing stalls of street vendors.14 _{FPI mainly confined itself to}

threats. Television stations and organizers of film festivals, for example, were left in no doubt that their offices or cinemas would no longer be safe if the screening of certain films was to go ahead.15

Besides curbing the distribution of films, in post-Soeharto Indonesia at times fear of protests from Islamic groups also hindered the production process. In 2001 film director Garin Nugroho planned to make a film Izinkan Aku Menciummu Sekali Saja (Let me kiss you just once) about a young boy in a pesantren (Islamic boarding school), who dreams of kissing a beautiful Chinese girl whom he happens to see walking by every day. However, after protests from pesantren representatives the producer retracted funding for the production of the film (Wardhana 2001b). Garin relocated the setting to Papua were Roman Catholics are in the majority. In 2003 the film was released under the title Aku Ingin Menciummu Sekali Saja (I want to kiss you just once).16 _{Garin Nugroho found himself contending not just with}

protests from Muslim groups. In 2005 during the pre-production of his film Sinta Obong (The burning of Sinta), the Indonesian Hindu’s Women Movement (Gerakan Perempuan Hindu Indonesia, GPHMI) repudiated the film because it believed the screenplay was offensive to the Goddess Sinta and the true story of the Ramayana. GPHMI also stressed that even though Hinduism was a minority religion in Indonesia the nation should be aware that 1 billion Hindus believed in the Ramayana. Moreover, they declared, Bali, Hinduism, and its symbols and sacred books should neither be attacked by bombs (referring to terrorist attacks that were committed in the name of Islam in 2002 and 2005), nor treated with contempt (pelecehan) (‘Film Sinta Obong.’2005). In the end Garin produced the film after judiciously changing the title to the more comprehensive Opera Jawa (Javanese opera, 2006).

In addition to these examples, generally speaking between 1999 and 2004 the religious protests, the majority of them launched by Muslim groups, were not markedly different from those staged under the New Order. In the outcry raised about film and VCD and DVD productions most protests addressed ‘amoral’ films depicting what was interpreted as pornography as well as female nudity. On television in particular Latin-American telenovelas and such American series as Baywatch, Melrose Place, and VIP were considered to be incompatible with Islamic values, which were often cited as forming the basis of Indonesian culture and civilization. As a sop to accommodate members of the Islamic community, programmes which may have been construed as offensive were put on hold during the Islamic

fasting month. But as soon as Ramadan was over, they simply resurfaced (Ant/ksp 2001; asa 2000; yus 2002). Again, notwithstanding the various examples which may be adduced, it must be stressed that religious protests about films were sporadic and did not cover all films which might have incited controversy from a religious moralist point of view. For example, a kissing scene in the teen flick Ada Apa Dengan Cinta (What’s up with Love, Rudi Soedjarwo 2002), and a kiss by a gay couple in Arisan (Gathering, Nia Dinata 2003) were passed over without a murmur of dissent.

After the ban on Buruan Cium Gue! and protests about various television programmes by AMAP at the end of August 2004, discourses began to address the need for the involvement of religious authorities in film and television production. Because of the controversy aroused by Buruan Cium Gue!, both the strengthening of the role and representation of Islamic authority figures in the Film Censor Institute and a revision of censorship rules in the near future, including the assessment of film titles, was on the cards (‘Mana yang perlu.’ 2004).. _{Some favoured the involvement}

of Islamic authority figures, not as any official part of the state system but in the form of pre-censorship or self-censorship in the production process. In early August 2003, a year before the controversy about Buruan Cium Gue! erupted, a representative of film professionals in the Film Censor Institute, Tatiek Malyati Ws, had already put in a request for stronger self-censorship on the part of film producers and television stations. Moreover, she had called on the leaders of the nation, parents, and religious authorities to be pro-active in lodging complaints against pornographic films and participating in censorship (‘Sensor segera.’2003).17 _{In the controversy which blew up around Buruan}

Cium Gue!, it seems her ideas were implemented. Besides pro-active protests leading to a ban on a film, king of soaps Raam Punjabi announced that he intended to involve religious leaders in the revision of Buruan Cium Gue! (‘Mana yang perlu.’2004). It is difficult to obtain any specific clarification of the ways and extent Raam Punjabi proceeded in honouring this promise and involve Islamic authorities in his film and television productions. But after the ban on Buruan Cium Gue! religious soaps began to mushroom on television, and were no longer confined to the framework of Ramadan. The boom in production of religious soaps commenced in February 2004 when the private television station TPI began to broadcast the series Rahasia Ilahi (God’s Secret).18 _{The series}

was based on true stories of people who had experienced the wonders of God, accounts of which were published in the magazines Hidayah (God’s guidance) and Allah Maha Besar (God is great). Rahasia Ilahi was hosted by Ustaz Arifin Ilham, a young, fairly popular dai. Television viewers loved the series and it brought TPI to the number one spot in AC Nielsen ratings with a share of 15.8 per cent. Sensing a successful formula other television stations were quick to follow suit with similar programmes.19 _{In addition to the majority of the}

series which drew their stories from among the common people, there were some religious soaps which were based on stories from old Islamic sources. These sources, mainly hadits

(traditional collection of stories relating to words or deeds of the Prophet Muhammad, the chief source of guidance for understanding religious questions), were adapted to a present- day setting. To name one, TPI’s Takdir Ilahi (God’s divine decree) used hadits taken from Bukhari and Muslim which were inserted in the books Mi’ah qishshah wa qishshah fi anis al-shalihin wa samir al-muttaqin (One hundred tales and the tale of the righteous), written by Muhammad Amin Al-Jundi Al Muttaqin, and Madarij al-salikin (The path of the mystic traveler) written by Ibnu Qayyim Al-Jauziah.20 _{In advertisements, TPI took pains to highlight}

that Takdir Ilahi was an ‘actualization of occurrences which had happened once in the time of the Messenger of God’ (Ruslani 2005).21

The above-mentioned religious television series featured both supernatural occurrences and an Islamic authority figure. A kyai, ustaz, ulama, or dai appeared at the beginning or the end of the series, either to introduce and explain the programme, or to play a role in the story itself. For example, the young Ustaz Jeffry al-Buchory, who was very popular among teenagers, hosted the programme Azab Ilahi (God’s Wrath, Lativi). Each episode of Astaghfirullah ((May God Forgive Me! also an exclamation to be used when shocked by immoral behaviour, SCTV) featured an ustaz in its storyline, and the series Takdir Ilahi always ended with pronouncements by Ustaz Ali Mustafa Yaqub from MUI. Mustafa not only explained the hadits on which the series was based to round off the programme, he also supervised every stage of production. In his summing up, Mustafa presented a disquisition on the solution by which the evil forces which had exerted a baneful influence on the main character could be exorcised. The director of the series, Chairul Umam, emphasized that in the series the ustaz used the Islamic ruqyah method, a sanctioned instrument to expel evil, consisting of prayers which are consonant with the syariat (Islamic Law). As most of the religious series either contained elements of mystery or the intrusion of supernatural occurrences, the mission of the authority figures was to link these specifically to religious teachings. The producer of Takdir Ilahi, Dondy Sudjono, and Chairul Umam explained that the appearance of Islamic authority figures in their series was to ensure that proper information was disseminated about how to deal with the supernatural. Without the explanations provided by Islamic authority figures, people might not read the series correctly, and there was the lurking danger that these series would only feed people’s superstitions (Kalim and Fadjar 2005).

For excerpts from some religious series see Disc Three 6.2.

In fact, the religious programmes did not differ greatly from regular television horror programmes. Cultural critic Taufiqurrahman described the contents of the religious series as:

[…] regular soap operas with God’s name attached to their title [which] carry a formulaic story line in which sinners of all kinds, from corrupt state officials and gamblers to a misbehaving son, will be punished by God with a very painful death, ranging from literally being burnt in hell, eaten by flesh-eating worms to being swallowed alive by the earth. By the drama’s end,

sinners will face in the afterlife in return for their misdemeanors and will remind viewers not to commit sinful acts

(Taufiqurrahman 2005)

Moreover, Taufiqurrahman pointed out, as time passed some religious soaps deteriorated into campy horror shows featuring ‘devout religious leaders [who] become engaged in Armageddon-like battles against demons (portrayed with red skin and two horns on their heads) and ghosts of all kinds’ (Ibid.).

Only a few ‘Islamic’ soaps did not contain elements of mystery or supernatural occurrences. The actor and film producer Deddy Mizwar, who had produced and directed the Islamic film Kiamat Sudah Dekat (Judgment Day Is Nigh, 2003) and played a role in its soap version, regarded the religion-inspired series as a mere extension of the horror and mystery programmes. In his opinion, the only difference was that these programmes now were packaged as if they were about Islam. The soaps, he argued, actually just repeated the success of mystery films in Indonesian cinema in the 1970s. This was the reason Deddy claimed that ‘[…] our nation now has stepped back again to the 1970s’ (Fitrianto 2005).22

Despite the dubious quality of the majority of religious programmes, MUI embraced them wholeheartedly. In 2005 its secretary-general, Din Syamsudin, was quoted by the weekly Gatra as saying that there had been an internal discussion about the possibility of handing out awards to television channels which ran religious series (Taufiqurrahman 2005).23 _Ismail

Yusanto, spokesperson of the Hizbut Tahrir, also believed that the religious shows breathed a breath of fresh air into TV programming (Ibid).

6.3. The Post-Soeharto dispute over censorship: Spirits of Reform and